Demo mode

Imagine your district data in WHIT

Viewing synthetic demonstration data. This experience is read-only.

Whit Formative Assessment

Leaves of Learning Benchmark

District overview for Whitman Demonstration District

  • 4 schools
  • 185 students
  • Completed 49 days ago
Selected Assessment
Data Freshness Up to Date
Status: Up to date. Last refreshed Feb 26, 2026 · 12:05 PM. Data through Feb 20, 2026 · 4:51 PM.
Students Needing Support AI

AI-identified students who may need targeted intervention based on benchmark performance.

Data Freshness Up to Date
Status: Up to date. Last refreshed Feb 26, 2026 · 12:05 PM. Data through Feb 20, 2026 · 4:51 PM.
Current analytics include all submitted student work.
Preview Assessment
Export
Download PDF
Full benchmark report with charts and tables.
Export
Download CSV
Raw student-level data for your own analysis.
Feb 2026
Scope
Subject
Assessments

Generating Analytics

Your analytics are being prepared. This page will refresh automatically.

Completion Rate
91.9%
170 of 185 students
Mastery Rate
73.8%
Target: 80%
Blind Spots Identified
4
District-wide instructional gaps
School Performance

Click any school row to view detailed analytics

Mastery by School

Performance distribution across participating schools

District Standard Performance

Deterministic mastery across assessed standards — weakest first

RI.9-10.1▾
Cite strong and thorough textual evidence.
69.7%
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RI.9-10.1 Cite strong and thorough textual evidence.
W.9-10.1▾
Write arguments to support claims with clear reasoning.
74.9%
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.W.9-10.1 Write arguments to support claims with clear reasoning.
RI.9-10.2▾
Determine a central idea and analyze its development.
75.4%
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RI.9-10.2 Determine a central idea and analyze its development.
< 50% Critical
50–70% Focus
> 70% Strong
Needs Support

Schools

Quick comparison of deterministic mastery across schools.

School Completion Mastery Students Status
Analytics
Open School Dashboard
View detailed performance metrics, teacher breakdown, and standards analysis.
93.5%
74.2%
 46 Watch
Analytics
Open School Dashboard
View detailed performance metrics, teacher breakdown, and standards analysis.
93.9%
79.8%
 49 On Track
Analytics
Open School Dashboard
View detailed performance metrics, teacher breakdown, and standards analysis.
93.9%
75.9%
 49 On Track
Analytics
Open School Dashboard
View detailed performance metrics, teacher breakdown, and standards analysis.
85.4%
63.6%
 41 Watch

School Performance Heatmap

At-a-glance comparison across all schools and standards

SCHOOL OVERALL Mastery CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RI.9-10.1 CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RI.9-10.1 CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.W.9-10.1 CCSS.ELA-Literacy.W.9-10.1 CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RI.9-10.2 CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RI.9-10.2
Analytics
Open School Dashboard
View detailed performance metrics, teacher breakdown, and standards analysis.
79.8% Overall
75.8% Strong
80.2% Strong
82.3% Strong
Analytics
Open School Dashboard
View detailed performance metrics, teacher breakdown, and standards analysis.
75.9% Overall
71.4% Strong
76.9% Strong
78.4% Strong
Analytics
Open School Dashboard
View detailed performance metrics, teacher breakdown, and standards analysis.
74.2% Overall
70.2% Strong
75.2% Strong
77.2% Strong
Analytics
Open School Dashboard
View detailed performance metrics, teacher breakdown, and standards analysis.
63.6% Overall
60.0% Focus Area
66.0% Focus Area
61.6% Focus Area
Teaching Blind Spots

Systemic misconceptions identified across the district — click to expand

Students interpret 'meticulous' by surface context or related nouns rather than its precise adjective meaning, causing incorrect short-answer definitions.

literalism
Common Misconception

Students define 'meticulous' using adjacent context (e.g., 'an experiment') or general positive words.

Correct Understanding

Define 'meticulous' as 'showing great attention to detail; extremely careful and precise,' and cite textual cues that support that meaning.

Next Step: Project the sentence, model annotation (underline cue), ask students to write a 1–2 sentence definition citing the cue, collect exit slips within the same lesson (within 10 instructional days).

Impact
Seen in % of classes 100.0%
Standards CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RI.9-10.4

Students conflate denotation and connotation, selecting literal dictionary meanings when the question requires implied tone or cultural associations.

level_confusion
Common Misconception

Treat denotation and connotation as interchangeable.

Correct Understanding

Identify dictionary meaning (denotation) and separate implied feeling or association (connotation), citing textual examples for each.

Next Step: Teach a 10–15 minute mini-lesson using the provided frame, run 10-minute partner labeling practice, collect one exit evidence annotation within 10 instructional days.

Impact
Seen in % of classes 100.0%
Standards CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RI.9-10.4

Students blur topic, central idea, and theme, using topic words in place of central idea or theme when asked for author's main point.

level_confusion
Common Misconception

Answer with the subject/topic (e.g., 'pollution').

Correct Understanding

State a central idea that explains what the author argues about the topic and reference supporting details that connect to that idea.

Next Step: Model a central-idea map, assign paired map practice, and collect one student map as an exit artifact within 10 instructional days.

Impact
Seen in % of classes 100.0%
Standards CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RI.9-10.2

Students select evidence that matches a topic word or surface feature rather than evidence that directly strengthens the claim about pollution.

misapplied_heuristic
Common Misconception

Choose any sentence that mentions 'pollution' as supporting evidence.

Correct Understanding

Choose evidence that directly ties cause-and-effect or quantitative claim language to the claim (e.g., a statistic about water contamination for a water pollution claim).

Next Step: Run the 15-minute evidence-selection mini-task, collect student highlights, and enter item-level error counts into the shared spreadsheet within the next PLC cycle.

Impact
Seen in % of classes 66.7%
Standards CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RI.9-10.1, CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RI.9-10.4
Professional Development Priorities 4 recommendations
  • 1 Explicit context-based vocabulary instruction for academic adjectives (target: …
  • 2 Teach and practice denotation vs. connotation labeling and …
  • +2 more
Click to expand
1

Explicit context-based vocabulary instruction for academic adjectives (target: 'meticulous') across Grade 9–10 ELA.

CRITICAL
Week 1 (PLC) + next_2_weeks coaching cycles Grade 9–10 ELA teachers (all schools) CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RI.9-10.4

Canon 3 appears systemically: 100.0% (3 schools, 11 classes, 298 students) show misunderstanding; Q1 district mastery 51.2% indicating vocabulary gap hurting short-answer items.

2

Teach and practice denotation vs. connotation labeling and justification routines.

HIGH
PLC Week 1; practice in next_2_weeks Grade 9–10 ELA teachers CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RI.9-10.4

Canon 4 systemic: 100.0% (3 schools, 11 classes, 134 students) and Q2 baseline 66.1% indicates room for targeted gain.

3

Strengthen text-evidence selection routines for claim-support items (air vs. water pollution distinctions).

HIGH
next_2_weeks PLC + Week 2 coaching ELA teachers in affected classes (Canyon & West Ranch) and districtwide refresh CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RI.9-10.1, CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RI.9-10.4

Canon 2 emerging in 2 schools: 66.7% prevalence (17 students, 3 classes); Q4 best/worst variance high and Valencia localized hotspot on related concept (canon 7, 69 students).

4

Build short-answer modeling and scoring rubrics to raise short_answer mastery (avg 47.0%).

MODERATE
PLC next_2_weeks; implement daily quick-writes in following two weeks Grade 9–10 ELA teachers, priority focus at Grass and Sky Prep CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RI.9-10.2, CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RI.9-10.4

Short-answer items average mastery 47.0; modeling and rubric use are low-refined per performance patterns and Grass and Sky Prep low outcomes (mastery 55.4%).

Loading key insight…

District Narrative AI Analysis
Read Full
District Narrative

District summary: Campaign 7 (Whitman Demonstration District) shows strong engagement (402/430 completed, 93.5%) and overall mastery 73.1% (430 students scope). Strengths: MCQ items average mastery 72.2% and two schools (West Ranch: 98.6% completion, 78.2% mastery; Valencia: 92.9% completion, 73.2% mastery) show capacity to deliver grade-level RI content. Emerging risks: three systemic blind spots in RI standards—vocabulary (canon 3: "meticulous"), denotation vs. connotation (canon 4), and confusion among topic/central idea/theme (canon 6)—each flagged in 100.0% of classes/schools and affecting large student counts (canon 3: 100.0% — 3 schools, 11 classes, 298 students; canon 4: 100.0% — 3 schools, 11 classes, 134 students; canon 6: 100.0% — 3 schools, 11 classes, 95 students). Localized concern: Open Road Academy has a single-school hotspot on air vs. water pollution (canon 7) affecting 69 students across 8 classes (20.4% prevalence at that school). Specific item risk: short-answer items underperform (short_answer avg mastery 47.0; question 1 "meticulous" district mastery 51.2%). Equity/variance: Grass and Sky Prep trails peers (mastery 55.4%, completion 86.4%) and accounts for the lowest school-level performance on multiple items (e.g., Q1 42.1%, Q3 52.6%, Q4 57.9%). Implication for instruction: prioritize explicit vocabulary and text-evidence routines across Grade 9–10 ELA classrooms, add targeted short-answer practice and rubrics, and run a focused walkthrough/PLC cycle at Grass and Sky Prep within the next PLC cycle. District next moves (summary): 1) Run a 45–60 minute PLC in Week 1 to teach explicit context-based vocabulary routines (target: raise Q1 mastery from 51.2% → +10 percentage points district-wide within next benchmark window). 2) Provide a two-week, coach-led micro-PD on denotation/connotation and topic vs. central idea mapping for Grade 9–10 ELA teachers with exemplar lesson frames and rubrics. 3) Direct site leaders at Grass and Sky Prep to run two instructional rounds (Week 1–2) focused on short-answer modeling and evidence selection (target: increase Canyon mastery by 8–10 percentage points on targeted items within next benchmark window). Evidence sources: canonical misconception bundles (canon_ids 3,4,6,2) and question-level performance (Q1–Q4), plus localized hotspot (canon 7 at Open Road Academy, school_id 15683).

⚓
O Captain! My Captain!

Exemplar teachers leading the way by standard

HA
Harper Song
Open Road Academy
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RI.9-10.1
81.0% exemplar teacher mastery
HA
Harper Song
Open Road Academy
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.W.9-10.1
84.0% exemplar teacher mastery
HA
Harper Song
Open Road Academy
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RI.9-10.2
87.0% exemplar teacher mastery
"

The powerful play goes on, and you may contribute a verse.

— Walt Whitman

Performance Explorer

Performance Explorer

Compare schools and standards across your district

Select a school to view standard performance.